Originally Posted by
findark
There have been a lot of data points suggesting that cumulative spend with UA impacts GS decisions, with a line of 100-110k of UA metal PQD over the trailing three years as a possible baseline.
This is the only way I can justify my qualification years versus my miss years. I am sure that a huge single year also counts (that it's not just one "rule") but when I'm comfortably over the trailing year $100K threshold I make it and when I'm not I don't. This also makes sense in the context of UA trying to smooth customer spend trends. Someone who spends 60/35/45 is probably a "better" customer than someone who spends 50/0/50, just to use an extreme example.